Individualized Group Learning

Chencheng Cai; Rong Chen; Min-ge Xie

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1906.05533

Individualized Group Learning

Chencheng Cai·Rong Chen·Min-ge Xie

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Many massive data are assembled through collections of information of a large number of individuals in a population. The analysis of such data, especially in the aspect of individualized inferences and solutions, has the potential to create significant value for practical applications. Traditionally, inference for an individual in the data set is either solely relying on the information of the individual or from summarizing the information about the whole population. However, with the availability of big data, we have the opportunity, as well as a unique challenge, to make a more effective individualized inference that takes into consideration of both the population information and the individual discrepancy. To deal with the possible heterogeneity within the population while providing effective and credible inferences for individuals in a data set, this article develops a new approach called the individualized group learning (iGroup). The iGroup approach uses local nonparametric techniques to generate an individualized group by pooling other entities in the population which share similar characteristics with the target individual, even when individual estimates are biased due to limited number of observations. Three general cases of iGroup are discussed, and their asymptotic performances are investigated. Both theoretical results and empirical simulations reveal that, by applying iGroup, the performance of statistical inference on the individual level are ensured and can be substantially improved from inference based on either solely individual information or entire population information. The method has a broad range of applications. Two examples in financial statistics and maritime anomaly detection are presented.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Chencheng Cai, Rong Chen, Min-ge Xie. 2019-06-13. Individualized Group Learning. https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.05533

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2026

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2026

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME↗